posted Feb 24, 2008

It would make more sense if his players were of a similar standard such that the replacements did not decrease the team's quality.

That is quite obviously not the case and resting players for the latter stages of tournaments that, due to fielding weaker teams, you will no longer be in is very strange.

It will be interesting to see next season whether he has learnt this lesson - assuming he's still there of course.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

Rafa will NEVER learn not to feild weaker teams in the cups. He has done it for the last 4 years and I see no reason why he will suddenly change his mind. The man redefines "stubborn!"

our Bench is weaker than some others out there, but we are still punching well below our weight in the table.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

"Rafa will NEVER learn not to feild weaker teams in the cups. He has done it for the last 4 years and I see no reason why he will suddenly change his mind. The man redefines "stubborn!""

So Rafa should make the Prem his absolute, no 1 priority, yet it's a deriliction of his duty if he fields a weakened team in a cup competition?

Don't be ridiculous - expecially given that everyone fields weakened sides.

At least with Rafa you wouldn't see him putting out the reserves against Man U like Wenger did.

Besides which, it's not like we were outplayed against Barnsley. Those matches just happen sometimes. 5 shots cleared off the line? 2shots off the woodwork?

I challenge you to find a more 1 sided, unlucky defeat anywhere in English football this season.

Also interesting to note how many comments are saying the blame can 'only be put on our manager?'.

Wait, so are we now saying, in the weak after Wenger has begged Usumov not to invest more for fear of boardroom unrest, that owners saying they were basically looking to replace the manager has absolutely NO effect on the manager or players?

Again - don't be ridiculous. That fiasco has been, to my mind, the single biggest detriment to our form since the new year, and even then we're talking about draws rather than wins, ones that all looked like they were hugely down to confidence (IE mental IE influenced by off field events) issues, rather than that we were consistently being outplayed like, say, Newcastle are at the moment.

Are we saying now that the whole similar fiasco with Jol had no impact on their early season form?

Finally:

Plaese stop bleating about rotation. You make yourselves sound like clueless sheep. Fergie rotates just as much. As does Avram Grant. Every manager in the prem rotates - even Paul Jewell - it's an essential component of modern football, as unfit players simply can't compete over the course of a season.

Talk about tactics, players, whatever, but rotation by itself has nothing to do with it.

Besides, if rotation is so ludicrous, and Rafa so clueless for using it, then how come Rafa has won more points in a season than anyone except Dalglish in '88?

IE all the Hansen/Lawro rotation moaners banging on about how it wasn't like that in their day and how it can't work today - NONE of them were in a Liverpool side that has achieved as many points as Rafa has.

How is that for hypocracy?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

So Rafa should make the Prem his absolute, no 1 priority, yet it's a deriliction of his duty if he fields a weakened team in a cup competition?
-------------------------

High you miss the point.

Rafa has stated that the League is HIS and Parry's No.1 priority.

This was the first year that he stated he was happy with his players; the the league was the No.1 priority; and that with the arrival of 2-3 new signings thius would be the yeart to make the challenege.

So he goes into a rotational hell, one that doesn just replace like for like but puts players into other areas of the field and playing them in positions that do not favor their stronger foot.

The fact that he started rotationg in Spetember in fear of fatigue is naive. You have to get the points to have a competitive chance for the league. He stated that the league was No 1 priority and he blew it. The reason for the question mark over a weaker cu[ side is that The League was lown by January again and as such the FA Cup was the biggest Domestic trophy left.

He seems to not be able to recognise that Domestic success is what Liverpool fans needs more than most to continue to have some sort of banter and relevance on the domestic stage.

And its a sad day when Rafa's behaviour and actiosn result in Hicks son being abused and sapt at by Liverpool fans after the Boro game.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

I challenge you to find a more 1 sided, unlucky defeat anywhere in English football this season.

----------------------

Well - on a lighter note I suggest you look at the 2 games between Swansea and H&W - where the Swans hit the woodwork about 40 times whilst H&W had 5 shots on goal and scored 5 (over 180 minutes) !!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

comment by hesbighesred
posted 3 Hours Ago

"Rafa will NEVER learn not to feild weaker teams in the cups. He has done it for the last 4 years and I see no reason why he will suddenly change his mind. The man redefines "stubborn!""

So Rafa should make the Prem his absolute, no 1 priority, yet it's a deriliction of his duty if he fields a weakened team in a cup competition?

Don't be ridiculous - expecially given that everyone fields weakened sides.

At least with Rafa you wouldn't see him putting out the reserves against Man U like Wenger did.
------------------------------

Let me put this simply then. We have again been knocked out by a nothing team because a weakened side has been fielded.

when other managers field weakened sides they still WIN! If rafa was winning with second rate sides then I wouldn't give a toss. If you field a weakened side and lose then you can expect a lambasting from everyone. Rafa is making a habit of losing to teams he should be crushing.

You mention endless shots on goal being cleared off the line and bouncing back off the woodwork; that says to me "we needed to play Torres." Since he is the only striker who regularly scores. Our attack is impotent, we need another striker and some in midfield to take the onus of SG to make everything.

Please remember that Arsenal "reserves" whom you mention are very similar to the ones which routed the Liverpool 1st XI 3 - 6 at anfield

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

"They played an hour against 10, and were impotent untill Inter tired with both central defenders off the park. Benitez got lucky and Liverpool got unlucky...this result, as it is being portrayed, will leave Rafa more time to miss out on 4th and lose later in Europe anyway."

10 men are, more often than not, harder to break down especially when the team is the best team in ITALY, renowned for their defensive capabilities. We deserved the win and the margin and will hopefully go on to win the tie.

Don't forget, at least 3 english teams will lose in this round or later on.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

comment by Knight85-2
when other managers field weakened sides they still WIN!

-------------------

Oh dear.

Man U lost to Coventry with a weaker side

Arsenal lost to tottenham with a "weaker" side. (They had a few good players on the bench)

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

""we needed to play Torres.""

What, even though he wasn't fuly fit, and playing him risked him being grossly unfit/injured for the CL game?

As for CL priorites, Straeh, you're right about what Rafa said.

He even backed that up by playing a slightly weaker side at home to Marseille in the CL - as a result of which loss he was slated by many of the same fans who demand he prioritise the league.

Furthermore, Hicks went on record with the CL debacle saying that it was the prospect of us getting knocked out of the CL as well as the disagreements which led to Klinsmann being interviewed.

If we hadn't reached the knockouts, Rafa would have been sacked.

The league may well be Rafa's priority, but it most certainly isn't anywhere near as important to our owners as reaching the CL knockout stages is.

I realise that Fergie has won more often this season playing weaker teams, but he has a squad that has had fortunes spent onindividuals to strengthen what was already England's second strongest squad when Rafa arrived.

It also remains a fact that it is impossible for players to play 3 times a weak and maintain full fitness, it simply is not physically possible, as the sports medical community agrees - hence why the countries top physios support a winter break and fewer games if possible to help our national team's chances.

We won the game in the last 5 minutes against Inter - IE our greater fitness really told against the ten men. That fitness has a lot to do with pleyers having been rested against Barnsley, a game, like I say, that we had more than enough chances to win handsomely even without Torres.

Re Swansea and H&W - I stand corrected mate, up Swansea, as you're doing a nice job with our young Anderson!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

High;

You are right but the CL progress was linked to Rafa's demand for more money in the January trasnfer window.

If Rafa had been doing a good job I doubt there would have been much friction. But Rafa's demands came at a time when the owners had already funded the arrival of Torres, Babel, Benayoun & Voronin and saw the "improved" side bottom of their qualificatrion group, and odds on to go out. The comments of "best work with what you have got", were wise words because they were all he had avaiable to work with and secondly no qualification would have severley hampered the revenue opportunities for the club and thus reducing what they had projected.

Rafa turned those comments into fuel for his spat with the owners.

Success breed success and it normally gets rewarded with transfer kitty's and the irony is that by prioritizing cup competitions, it means that being knoecked out early redsuces the numer of games and potential revenue for the club for transfers. If the club is finding that money is tight isn't it better to play more games and generate revenue rather than try to pick and chose certain matches. It also means the players get into the habit of winning, a winning team does feel the fatigue as much as others, prim example would be Uniteds treble side of 99.

add comment | complain about this comment